The cost of the 25-year naming rights deal was not disclosed, but Bucks officials initially had hoped to recoup $7 million to $10 million a year, according to the Journal-Sentinel. The Bucks will play their first game in the new arena in the fall.

Larson did not vote to approve the subsidy for Fiserv, according to the Journal-Sentinel. He did, however sign on on the nine-figure public payout to build the Bucks a basketball arena.

Conflicts stem from publicly financed arenas

Publicly financing the arena is really the crux of the problem here. Fiserv is free to spend its budget how it sees fit. If executives and shareholders believe buying naming rights to a basketball arena is good business, then that’s their prerogative whether they end up taking the taxpayer subsidy or not.

But the optics of the Bucks and Fiserv teaming up to profit off of public money while the public doesn’t get a direct financial return on the investment are poor.

Other cities refuse to pay for stadiums

It’s a problem alleviated in part if cities and states develop the backbones to refuse to continue to finance playgrounds for the teams of wealthy business owners. It’s a stance that’s been seen recently in California with lawmakers and taxpayers refusing to finance NFL stadiums.

Of course that stance led to the Chargers leaving San Diego for a privately funded L.A. home and the Raiders making plans to move to Las Vegas, which appeared more than happy to open the coffers.

But it’s also a stance that would have left Larson without the need to publicly lambast a naming rights deal if he hadn’t voted to put taxpayers on the hook to begin with.